Wednesday, February 10, 2016

Feminists continue to devour their young for Hillary

Over the weekend, a couple of relics of feminism -- Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright -- came down from the attic to yell at the young girls on the lawn to quit flirting with the boys, and to do their duty by voting for Hillary Clinton.

It was a disaster. Steinem apologized, and Albright was herded back to her room with an offer of orange Jell-O.

Young women do not want to be shamed into voting and that's very clear and nobody intended for that to happen. I think what they -- I'm from the next generation after, you know, Gloria and Madeline and we -- I've got their pictures on my wall, I mean, they are just -- they're total heroes. Of course they're going to say that we want to be able to see finally a woman as president after 227 years. But the Clinton campaign is saying not just any woman. We wouldn't say vote for Sarah Palin.

We want to vote for somebody who shares your values and who is going to fight for those things that you really care about and who has been in the trenches on all of these things that women care about for four decades? It's been Hillary Clinton. Who has been fighting for kids all of her life? It's Hillary Clinton. Who has been fighting to make sure that there is parental leave and children's health care? It's Hillary Clinton. so what she wants to convey is don't vote for me solely because i'm a woman. vote for me because I am going to fight for you, I'm the most qualified person to ever run. you need a commander in chief who understands the globe and by the way I would add -- I would add 227 years is long enough.

So there you have it. Women can decide what to do with their bodies -- whether their baby in the womb lives or dies -- but they cannot make informed decisions on who to vote for, so some woman who is older and wiser must tell them who to vote for. Oh no, not Sarah Palin. Don't be silly. You must vote for Hillary because 227 years.

That's the argument: 227 years.

After being ignored in the 1980s under President Reagan and mocked in the 1990s by President Clinton, feminism made a comeback under President Obama. I have a feeling, Clinton just killed it again. Her husband's abuse of women, and her help in facilitating that abuse, are opening some young eyes, true. But of more damage is the attempt to bully young women into voting for her.

If you are aborting your babies and not having kids, so you're not a parent, why do you need parental leave? If Liberals were family-friendly, I could sympathize with Granholm's grossly overstated argument for Hillary, but the older feminists have turned their young daughters into baby-killers, and childless women don't see child health or parental leave as big issues for themselves. Just sayin' those may have become fringe issues for the latest generation of women voters.